At 01/24/2017 05:14 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
OK so all of these pass original check, but have problems reported by lowmem. Separate notes about each inline.
Thanks for your images! It really helps a lot. I tested my patches against these images. Feel free to test them: https://github.com/adam900710/btrfs-progs/tree/lowmem_fixes
~500MiB each, these three are data volumes, first two are raid1, third one is single. https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B_2Asp8DGjJ9Z3UzWnFKT3A0clU https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B_2Asp8DGjJ9V0ROdHNoMW1BVE0 https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B_2Asp8DGjJ9Zmd1LXl6MU5WeXc
RAID1 ones are not stable for us to check, as it already contains some chunk tree error after recovery. The single one I didn't download, after 324M one encounters some btrfs-image recovery problem.
19MiB, about 15 minutes old, rootfs, OS installation only https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B_2Asp8DGjJ9TF9LVkFlcDBzOG8
Passed now.
55MiB, about 1 month old, rootfs, not much activity https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B_2Asp8DGjJ9bkJFc01qcVJxNnM
Passed too.
324MiB, about 5 months old, used as rootfs, all read-write snapshots used as rootfs are forced readonly, a regression previously reported without any dev response https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B_2Asp8DGjJ9ZmNxdEw1RDBPcTA http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-btrfs/msg61817.html https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=191761
Recovery caused quite a lot of false alert on chunk tree. Still digging if the remaining errors are valid or not. Thanks, Qu
-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
